In light of this past week's election results, I was very intrigued to physically see maps on the various news reporting agencies websites that broke out which states voted Dem vs. Rep.

Now before this discussion gets into the regular name calling and party bashing, I would genuinely appreciate some honest feedback about how the division has resulted. As an outsider, I personally find your two party system badly flawed as it seems that it has become more voting against the other party than voting for any particular candidate and what they stand for.

There have been some very good discussions in a few of the other threads that have enlightened me to some of the ideals of each party (fully aware that the limited opinions reflected here do not necessarily accurately represent who the party's are).

Now my actual question....and I know it will likely offend the Rep supporters....is how the split developed and why it appears that the split represents a certain perception?

I have had the pleasure of travelling extensively through the western US (and actually own property in SoCal) but have been limited to Georgia and Florida in the East.

My perception of the states that have voted Rep, and consequently those that lost the election, is that they are the ones that could be perceived by outsiders as being "redneck" or "bible belt" or "ultra-conservative", etc.

My experiences in both Georgia and Arizona (both Rep states) are in support of the perception. They seem to be "redneck" and, frankly, racist (especially Georgia).

As has been mentioned in other threads, is this really who the Reps are?....and if so, can they adjust to win another election in the future?

Again, I have no horse in this race, and would not be in support of either of the current candidates. Sadly, the actual candidate seems to matter little in the big scheme of things.

I hope that this can be discussed rationally and honestly. If it becomes too argumentative or if I have offended the Reps greatly, I will ask the mods to take down the thread.

I'm going to stay out of this one, but I'll leave this here for a more accurate discussion. Some states aren't as blue as you think, the same way the two states you mentioned (AZ and GA) aren't as red as you label them.

I don't really know that I'd consider Az redneck and why label it as such or any different vs NM?

smohr's graph shows the better picture since it's not in terms of total vote. Does that alter your perception at all? In states like IL, most of the state is traditionally GOP, but the majority of the large populous of Cook County (where Chicago is) tends to go Dem thus giving the state electoral to the Dems. This does not mean, however, that the counties surrounding Cook are 'redneck' or the like.

I have been voting since JFK in 1960 and I have found that the color and parts of the maps have changed a lot over the years. Years ago the Southern States were all blue and the North was pretty much red. But the maps and states have evolved into mostly red with the major cities being blue. With very large populations the City States have come to rule the National elections and in some cases even State races.

In light of this past week's election results, I was very intrigued to physically see maps on the various news reporting agencies websites that broke out which states voted Dem vs. Rep.

Now before this discussion gets into the regular name calling and party bashing, I would genuinely appreciate some honest feedback about how the division has resulted. As an outsider, I personally find your two party system badly flawed as it seems that it has become more voting against the other party than voting for any particular candidate and what they stand for.

There have been some very good discussions in a few of the other threads that have enlightened me to some of the ideals of each party (fully aware that the limited opinions reflected here do not necessarily accurately represent who the party's are).

Now my actual question....and I know it will likely offend the Rep supporters....is how the split developed and why it appears that the split represents a certain perception?

I have had the pleasure of travelling extensively through the western US (and actually own property in SoCal) but have been limited to Georgia and Florida in the East.

My perception of the states that have voted Rep, and consequently those that lost the election, is that they are the ones that could be perceived by outsiders as being "redneck" or "bible belt" or "ultra-conservative", etc.

My experiences in both Georgia and Arizona (both Rep states) are in support of the perception. They seem to be "redneck" and, frankly, racist (especially Georgia).

As has been mentioned in other threads, is this really who the Reps are?....and if so, can they adjust to win another election in the future?

Again, I have no horse in this race, and would not be in support of either of the current candidates. Sadly, the actual candidate seems to matter little in the big scheme of things.

I hope that this can be discussed rationally and honestly. If it becomes too argumentative or if I have offended the Reps greatly, I will ask the mods to take down the thread.

Sooooo, you want to keep it civil but only after saying all the red state citizenry are racist rednecks? Sigh.... passive aggressive is so dem of you.

Sooooo, you want to keep it civil but only after saying all the red state citizenry are racist rednecks? Sigh.... passive aggressive is so dem of you.

I live in what is considered the most redneck part of Canada....we're basically Texas North....so I don't find it as offensive as you seem to suggest.

If you don't believe the southern states and specifically the two I mentioned are not racist you are in denial. Arizona is badly racist towards Mexicans and Georgia towards blacks, and unashamed about it.

As I also mentioned, I don't have any affiliation to either of your party's but do look on with interest as the US and Canadian economies are unavoidably intertwined.

Do you disagree that the way the map presents itself seems to follow a certain pattern?

I have been voting since JFK in 1960 and I have found that the color and parts of the maps have changed a lot over the years. Years ago the Southern States were all blue and the North was pretty much red. But the maps and states have evolved into mostly red with the major cities being blue. With very large populations the City States have come to rule the National elections and in some cases even State races.

With regards to maps, this about says it. There aren't many large cities that are republican. I'm sure if you think about it enough you'll find some correlation between large cities voting democrat.

I don't take offense to any redneck references. I wouldn't call myself one but i do have some similar interests and i appreciate the fact that you will always know where you stand with a redneck. Also, when the shit hits the fan; i'll take redneck neighbors any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

__________________

-Joe

"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." — Frédéric Bastiat

Where in Georgia have you been? While I would certainly not say there is no racism, it is not as you seem to suggest. Keep in mind, Atlanta is over 50% black as are several other cities in the area. We even have some towns now that Hispanics are now the majority. So I am truly curious where all you have been in Georgia and if this perception is based on an small sampling.

BTW, this is not in defense, but rather to gain an understanding of your perception.

But to go a bit further, I am white and there are some parts I would simply not be welcome in. Made a wrong turn in Thomasville, GA one time and it was a quite interesting experience.

Where in Georgia have you been? While I would certainly not say there is no racism, it is not as you seem to suggest. Keep in mind, Atlanta is over 50% black as are several other cities in the area. We even have some towns now that Hispanics are now the majority. So I am truly curious where all you have been in Georgia and if this perception is based on an small sampling.

BTW, this is not in defense, but rather to gain an understanding of your perception.

But to go a bit further, I am white and there are some parts I would simply not be welcome in. Made a wrong turn in Thomasville, GA one time and it was a quite interesting experience.

Spent a full week in Atlanta, going back and forth to Augusta, with stops in a few smaller towns to play golf.

We were exposed to some very deep rooted racism throughout our visit. Was shocking and appalling to us to see it so out in the open.

And there is no racism in the ghettos of Chicago, DC, Baltimore, Philly and Atlanta huh? Wise up, you look more a fool than you probably are.

The racist suggestion was maybe pushing it a bit too far, but it is clear that from the State map that there is a certain pattern that exists (thanks to those that pointed out the county maps as they are interesting to see the urban vs suburban breakdown).

I watched an interview with Newt Gingrich yesterday who took on this discussion head on. He admitted that it was the alienation of the minority and women's vote that cost Romney the election. He talked about the party needing to be more inclusive and that dramatic change needed to occur within the party immediately and not just prior to the 2016 election campaign.

If one of the candidates who ran for the leadership of the Republican party sees this, why does my premise seem so offensive to you?